Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now • Hacker News Board

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#41

Post by Alinax » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 2:21 PM UTC

A lot of people seem to be out of their depth attributing to malice what can be simple stupidity or different sets of prioritization. Here is a few things to consider as you may be attempting to build a 'colonialism or racism' tone to your perspective: [IF YOU BELIEVE I AM WRONG, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO CHANGE MY MIND OR DISCUSS THE MATTER INSTEAD OF UP/DOWN VOTES]

* Did Dr. Piot think of colonialism when the WHO thought that the UK and US were better equipped to handle this new discovery?

* What if a more junior doctor in Muyembe's team made the conclusion and Muyembe used his position in power to get the vial to Europe?

* Should you as a researcher/doctor hold a discovery back for a few days/weeks/years and let people die for the sake of your name being put on it?

* What constitutes a discovery in such case? Concluding it might be something different and moving it forward or doing the lab work to figure out what it is? What not both? Should the treatment be considered a discovery? Should Muyembe add the name of all the people that came before him that provided the tools/knowledge to arrive at the treatment?

* Should Eyder Peralta (writer of the post) and NPR (an American news company) be seeing as anti-colonialist?

* Do country X attribute their success in part to other countries who gave them aid to get infrastructure, training , goods & services they need?

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#42

Post by Iv » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 2:34 PM UTC

nkozyra wrote: post #2

On the one hand, this is the classic story of colonialism: that the "winners" write the history books. There are likely thousands of stories like this, not the least of which in the woefully exploited African continent. On the other hand, "discovery" is a nebulous term, and plenty of discoveries have inconclusive origins. Why would we call this doctor the discoverer and not the first hospital workers to encounter the…

Ironically, the person credited for that was a Belgian who felt he was bullied by British into giving up the analysis to them. It is contempt all the way up.

"[Pattyn] claimed that we needed a few more days to ready it for transport," Piot wrote. "So we kept a few tubes of VERO cells, as well as some of the newborn mice, which were dying. Perhaps it was a stubborn rebellion against the whole Belgian history of constantly being forced to grovel to a greater power. That material was just too valuable, too glorious to let it go."

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#43

Post by leftyted » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 2:37 PM UTC

throw_m239339 wrote: post #40

johnmarinelli wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The core of the issue is the problem of colonial mentality. I suppose we would all like to brush it under the rug by saying it's difficult to pin down who really "discovered" Ebola, but I think this only perpetuates and helps internalise colonialism. I think a more clear cut case on the issue how the music industry ripped off Chuck Berry and repackaged him as Elvis Presley. The more we ignore and "justify" the issue…

It has absolutely nothing to do with "colonialism" as an intersectional buzzword. People take credit for other people's discoveries all the time(Edison for instance), and in this article this isn't even the case. The person who actually identified the virus "ebola" isn't the black guy that took blood samples of infected patients. Saying otherwise is rewriting history to fit an intersectional narrative, which is no be…

> It completely weakens the meaning of these words and turn them into insignificant weasel words because after all they apply to anything...

Exactly right.

"When all are guilty, no one is; confessions of collective guilt are the best possible safeguard against the discovery of culprits, and the very magnitude of the crime the best excuse for doing nothing."

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#44

Post by jvickers » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 2:56 PM UTC

Ntrails wrote: post #15

chirau wrote: post #12

What's new here? As an African myself I am not surprised at all. History favors its author. Explorer David Livingstone is credited with discovering the Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe. Despite the multitude of accounts and documentation of the locals' Mosi-oa-Tunya (the smoke that thunders) prior to his arrival. But hey, according to history it seems the locals had never encountered a waterfall a mile wide and hundreds of…

It's a bit like discovering the Americas when people already lived there. The falls were discovered and reported for the West by Livingstone. That doesn't make the discovery less important from a Western history perspective? I guess it's about recognising which truth is being told.

For the North, not the West.

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#45

Post by _carl_jung » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 2:57 PM UTC

mehrdadn wrote: post #26

_carl_jung wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We see the same thing in software. I've heard people answer "Grace Hopper", "Ada Lovelace", "Charles Babbage", "Alan Turing", etc. to the same question about the origin of computers. The real thing is the question needs to be more specific. Is it the origin of programmable computers? The origin of programming itself? The origin of non-programmable computers? And so on. I'm no epidemiologist, but I imagine something s…

3 of those 4 just seem... plain wrong? The first design of a general-purpose computer was obviously Babbage's. Wikipedia says work on it started in 1833, after the difference engine (already completed by 1822). He even developed two dozen programs for it between 1837-1840. He just ran into funding issues for his projects. Now if for some reason you feel an urge to hold an external issue like the lack of funding again…

I suppose most of the people I have heard these names from are not in the same league as you. I appreciate this summary though thanks.

I also regret my sarcasm, sorry.

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#46

Post by rayiner » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 3:10 PM UTC

> He took blood samples before she died and sent them to Belgium, where they had an electron microscope to try to identify the culprit. Scientists there and in the United States saw this was a new virus that caused hemorrhagic fever.

I think the whole thing is more complicated than the article makes it out to be. Clearly, Muyembe should get credit for the field epidemiology and recognizing that this could be something new. But can you say, as the article does, that someone “discovered” Ebola if they didn’t isolate the virus that causes it? Now you can argue the reason Muyembe couldn’t isolate the virus was because of colonialism and the Congolese government not being able to afford an expensive piece of equipment like an electron microscope. But would the Congolese have had electron microscopes but for Belgian colonialism?

I mean, there is a great story here even without the sensationalism. Man from Congo gets a PhD in Belgium, goes back home to help his country, but is held back by lack of local resources. What does Belgium owe in terms of equipping it’s former colony to help themselves? There is good material there.

As someone from a poor former colony myself, I find the whole thing somewhat patronizing. Bangladeshis rely on European and American geneticists to develop GMO rice to feed the country. But if the British hadn’t colonized us, it’s not like we would have developed that technology ourselves by now. But, on the flip side, we had math and civilization and indoor plumbing when the British were tribal people in the forest. No need to patronizingly give us credit for things we didn’t do.

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#47

Post by vanderZwan » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 3:13 PM UTC

nkozyra wrote: post #2

On the one hand, this is the classic story of colonialism: that the "winners" write the history books. There are likely thousands of stories like this, not the least of which in the woefully exploited African continent. On the other hand, "discovery" is a nebulous term, and plenty of discoveries have inconclusive origins. Why would we call this doctor the discoverer and not the first hospital workers to encounter the…

Your argument is valid, but I would like to point out that without context it reads as if the article and the Congolese doctor in question do not acknowledge this. However, they do:

> The discovery, says Muyembe, was thanks to a "consortium of research." But Google "Who discovered Ebola?" and you get a bunch of names — all of them white Western males. Dr. Jean Jacques Muyembe has been written out of history. "Yes, but it is ..." he pauses. He takes a breath and laughs, looking for the right way to respond. "Yes. It is not correct," he says. "It is not correct."

... and since the internet is full of people who love to comment on articles without actually reading them I think that is worth explicitly mentioning here.

(to be clear: not a slight against your comment)

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#48

Post by danharaj » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 3:24 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #46

> He took blood samples before she died and sent them to Belgium, where they had an electron microscope to try to identify the culprit. Scientists there and in the United States saw this was a new virus that caused hemorrhagic fever. I think the whole thing is more complicated than the article makes it out to be. Clearly, Muyembe should get credit for the field epidemiology and recognizing that this could be somethin…

> But would the Congolese have had electron microscopes but for Belgian colonialism?

Belgian colonialism was particularly vicious and damaging. It is certain that its consequences extend to the present day.

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#49

Post by danharaj » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 3:28 PM UTC

throw_m239339 wrote: post #40

johnmarinelli wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The core of the issue is the problem of colonial mentality. I suppose we would all like to brush it under the rug by saying it's difficult to pin down who really "discovered" Ebola, but I think this only perpetuates and helps internalise colonialism. I think a more clear cut case on the issue how the music industry ripped off Chuck Berry and repackaged him as Elvis Presley. The more we ignore and "justify" the issue…

It has absolutely nothing to do with "colonialism" as an intersectional buzzword. People take credit for other people's discoveries all the time(Edison for instance), and in this article this isn't even the case. The person who actually identified the virus "ebola" isn't the black guy that took blood samples of infected patients. Saying otherwise is rewriting history to fit an intersectional narrative, which is no be…

You seem to be using intersectional as a general pejorative.

Re: Congolese doctor discovered Ebola, but didn't get credit until now

#50

Post by SolaceQuantum » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 3:32 PM UTC

Alinax wrote: post #41

A lot of people seem to be out of their depth attributing to malice what can be simple stupidity or different sets of prioritization. Here is a few things to consider as you may be attempting to build a 'colonialism or racism' tone to your perspective: [IF YOU BELIEVE I AM WRONG, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO CHANGE MY MIND OR DISCUSS THE MATTER INSTEAD OF UP/DOWN VOTES] * Did Dr. Piot think of colonialism when the WHO thought…

"Did Dr. Piot think of colonialism when the WHO thought that the UK and US were better equipped to handle this new discovery?"

But Dr. Piot himself he intentionally left out the pepole who provided him with the evidence to make his claims, who themselves made the claims he was merely confirming.